Undoubtedly some protests can have devastating effects on the governments. The Arab Spring is a perfect example of small scale marches turning into full-blown revolutions which resulted in regime change in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. Protests have also had a positive impact in America where slavery and segregation were abolished thanks to the protests and marches organised by Martin Luther King. Finally, Gandhi had an innovative idea of protesting – peaceful non-violent civil disobedience which led to the independence of India from the British Empire.

Evidently some protests and marches achieve their aim and some do not. Perhaps one explanation for this could be the cause of the protests. While most marches have some validity, one can argue that marching against authoritarian regimes and against slavery and segregation is far more important than marching against a tuition fee rise or austerity measures. In addition, some of the causes which have been successful are quite objective. Anyone with any sense of morality would agree that racism, slavery and life under a dictatorship is wrong and thus it was inevitable that change would eventually come. Austerity measures, education cuts and even the invasion of Iraq are issues which are less clear cut and can be viewed as rather subjective.

Does that mean that less important matters should be left untouched by activists and protesters? Absolutely not: the secondary aim of marches is to illustrate the dissatisfaction of citizens against a particular policy and additionally to spread the narrative among the public who may not be aware of the damage these policies may be causing. This is exactly what the protests against the invasion of Iraq, against the tuition fee rise, and the most recent austerity march has achieved: the illustration of anger at the government and widespread media coverage attracting others to the cause.

Let us also not forget that student demonstrations can be very effective. For example, thousands of students took over the university as part of the uprising of the Polytechnic University of Athens. As a result the military junta stormed the university gates using tanks. The outcome was the killing of many students by the dictatorship, however, a few days later a nation-wide uprising took place against the junta. This demonstration resulted in the creation of the famous legislation known as the Students Asylum or Academic Asylum. This law was introduced to protect freedom of thought and expression on campuses in 1982, when memories of Greece’s repressive military dictatorships of the late 1960s and early 1970s were still raw.

So where does this leave modern day protests and marches? As the NUS prepares for another demonstration on the 21st of November, one can only ask whether it is just another waste of time or a vital action that may lead to positive results. From the examples given in this article it is clear that many marches do create change, regardless of whether it takes weeks or years. In addition these marches can achieve much more than transformation of the society. They can ensure the government is well aware that their citizens are not prepared to stand back and let the establishment make unpopular choices. Demonstrations keep the government on their toes and ensure politicians are always accountable for their actions. For these reasons, protest and demonstrations are vital ingredients of our political system and have an intrinsically important role to play in society.

It is utterly baffling that so many people failed to brave the rain and cast their vote, and it is infuriating that these will be the first people to complain when they don’t get their desired result.

[dhr]

[dhr]

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he Irish endorsement of the European Fiscal Pact was a hard fought campaign, with both the ‘YES’ and ‘NO’ camp sketching out the worst case scenario if voters did not listen to them. It will be to the benefit of Ireland in the long term that the ‘YES’ camp have won the day. Ireland is still in an incredibly fragile position economically, and the last thing they needed to do was spook the markets even further by rejecting tighter fiscal discipline.

In the end, the right camp won out. This is Europe’s second chance at imposing coordinated oversight of fiscal policy and setting workable and imposable limits on structural deficits. Even Germany, the economic powerhouse of Europe and the champion of efficiency, broke the original rules set out in the 1992 Maatrstict treaty on state borrowing. Whilst this has been a popular argument for anti-Europeans, not least in the southern economies, this is not the time to look back in anger, but to acknowledge that something must now be done to shore up the single currency for the future.

Also, Ireland deserve credit for offering their citizens a referendum, they were in fact the only European country to do so. Despite being in favour of gay marriage, Cameron was right to allow his party members to vote the way they wanted. Similarly, offering the people of Ireland a choice, and seeing the NO camp win, is still preferable to not having the vote in the first place. Allowing people the choice, and convincing them why they should vote for you, is how enlightened politics is done, otherwise, what’s the point of democracy?

Given the serious nature of this whole issue, and the amount of competing opinions trying to monopolise the media agenda, why did so many people decide it wasn’t worth their time to get out and vote?

The usual kneejerk response to this is that citizens are not well enough informed about the issues and therefore do not understand exactly what they are voting for. This is somehow the fault of politicians, failing to educate their citizens and making the information available.

These are not the days of trawling through dusty textbooks at the library, or booking an appointment with your local MP to learn about an issue. One or two clicks of a computer mouse will enable you to access all the information you need. Popular websites like the BBC or Guardian offer helpful Q & A sections, spelling out why each camp believes what it believes, and the likely consequences of voting either way.

Of course, some of us can get obsessive about politics, constantly updating twitter with BBC News 24 in the background, while others simply don’t have the time to devote to keeping abreast of all the latest news updates. This may be true, but what many political aficionados soon realise is that half an hour in front of the 10 o’clock news is more than enough for a healthy introduction to any debate.

Occasionally there might be an issue that baffles even the most interested news recipient. Scottish independence, for example, or Cameron’s Big Society, has highlighted how even a government can occasionally fail to spell out why their flagship policy is worth people’s time and attention. The Irish referendum was not one of these issues. The Euro crisis permeates our lives every day, from an in depth discussion on Newsnight to a glimpse at a Newspaper front page while queuing in a corner shop. It is therefore utterly baffling that so many people failed to brave the rain and cast their vote, and it is infuriating that these will be the first people to complain when they don’t get their desired result.

Once upon a time, theriskyshift.com was a hub of debate for the next generation of political thinkers. Then those editing the political thinkers went and found employers who weren't so keen on them editing political thinkers. Thus the story ended.